I was within the four walls during the Pagan, Ratten, Malthouse and Teague coaching stints and I have no doubt that Pagan and Malthouse lost (or never had) the players, which did not seem to be the case with either Teague or Ratten.
Right. This would give you a unique insight. Why do you think this seems to be a problem at Carlton (I'm speaking of Malthouse and Pagan) when these successful premiership coaches were well regarded and did not appear to "lose the players" at their previous clubs ?
If you start with one theory popularized by supporters, i.e we keep picking the wrong bloke, which then has a downstream effect where the coach will lose the players, then the choice of coach is pot luck, and our problems are very deep, because the ones doing the selecting have no clue, and after a certain honeymoon period the players cease to care. Big if true.
I suspect it's more likely there are factions between players than a specific issue with the coach.
If there are factions in our group they are enabled and driven by the culture at the club, these things do not form bottom up without some failure of governance.
Whether this is true or not, it does at least sound plausible IMO.
Pagan, Malthouse and Bolton definitely lost the players but I don't recall hearing about Teague (or Ratten) 'losing the players'; they seemed to suffer from impatience at Board level when the injury bug hit and bigger name coaches were available.
IMO Teague and Ratten were better skill-development coaches who deserved to be given more support. So far, the lack of skill development suggests that Voss lacks similar capabilities.
Carlton players must be a very unique breed. Malthouse did not seem to lose the players at Footscray, or West Coast, or Collingwood. Then suddenly he gets to Carlton.....
Pagan didn't seem to lose the players throughout his junior coaching days (fantastic record), didn't seem to lose the players at North. Then suddenly he comes to Carlton.......
I remain highly skeptical that the typical discourse(s) conducted by supporters bears much resemblance at all to the discourse conducted by football people within the four walls. If one measures this "losing the players" by on field performance, then I guess our fluctuations under Voss are like a case of lost and found ? First half 23, lost. Second half 23, found. First half 24, found, etc.
Sorry but I don't buy it. I should make it clear that my ire is not directed at you.
One has to legitimately wonder if there exists a Guinness World Records entry for lost players. The number of Carlton coaches that seem to "lose the players" is staggering, not only for the frequency with which it it occurs, but the brief time period between occurrences. Every few years, we hear about losing the players. Pagan, Malthouse, Teague, Bolton, now Voss. They don't seem to get lost at other clubs.
Chris Scott has drilled Geelong - no matter who is in or out they are drilled as a squad. Chris Fagan has drilled Brisbane Craig McRae has drilled Collingwood Sam Mitchell has drilled Hawthorn Adam Kingsley has drilled GWS Hardwick has drilled GCS,
What do these coaches have in common?
They were not re employed after getting sacked.
Lyon, Brad Scott, Clarkson is banana territory
Longmuir is just an awful coach like Buckley.
This isn't IMO a good argument. By this logic, the only viable candidates for senior coach are first timers or coaches that left previous clubs of their own accord.
Dogmatic beliefs rely on skewed perspectives and cherry picking data. Our greatest ever coach was sacked 4 times, including being reappointed at Carlton for a second stint, by a fair number of the same board, President, Vice President etc that sacked him in the first place.
Totally agree. Part of the issue is that some of the players you mention (Weitering, Cripps) are forced to carry an extra load because of missing parts of the structure. It also means they lack the support that would normally allow them to play their natural games.
McKay, Curnow and especially Walsh are injury carrying/ susceptible. They're a different kettle of fish. I'd add Jack to that list because he's become an important part of the defensive structure this year and a support for Weitering. To me their effectiveness and returning to something approaching their best (and that includes their durability and consistency of performance) is very much a wait and see.
To put it another way, I still believe that Harry, Charlie, Walsh, Cripps, Weitering etc still have within them the potential to play much better than they're playing now. I don't believe they've fallen off a cliff.
Lods. I appreciate that. I would suggest that when a team is struggling, you won't find players in good form, whether that's AA form or something else. There is clearly a list wide malaise that is affecting all our players, whether they have been A grade or not. Injuries are as you say clearly another contributing factor. IMO, I would not think what we see at the moment is the ceiling for any of our players going forward, whether they are stars or not.
Whether or not these players can reach their previous lofty heights is IMO a secondary consideration. The real issue IMO is whether they can get back to playing consistent good quality football. I'd suggest plenty of good footballers are never even AA in the first place. The fall can be marginal, and can be recoverable. Hopefully the journey is not one way.
Thats not the point - the point is why are they not playing to their best and who is in a position to ensure they are managed to be at their best.
I imagine the management of them being at their best is a collaborative, coordinated effort including players, line coaches, fitness and high performance staff, senior coaches, dieticians etc. The players are not circus animals, and the senior coach is not a ringmaster.
The reason we are the new St Kilda is that we have continued with the same methods that used to work, but no longer do. We have been impatient, short sighted and reactive. We have let corporate methods and individuals take charge for too long. What once may have been a successful blueprint simply does not work today. Today, the patient, stable clubs are the successful clubs. The edgy, brittle, reactive clubs are anchored at the bottom.
